Lords Sitting of 4 June 1824

WELCH JUDICATURE BILL.
Lord Kenyon Lord Kenyon moved the second reading of this bill. His lordship explained, that the object of it was, to amend the Judicature in Wales.
Lord Cawdorwas unable to discover the principle of the bill. It introduced many anomalies, and he would therefore move, as an amendment, that the bill be read a second time that day six months, and that an humble address be presented to his majesty, praying him to grant a commission to inquire into the state of

1089
the tribunals of Wales. His lordship further objected to the bill, that it was opposed to the recommendation of the committee, and he, for one, would object to placing more power in the hands of the Welch judges until they were rendered more dignified in the eyes of the people.
Lord Redesdalesupported the bill. The object of it was the improvement of the administration of justice in Wales. There might he objections to some of the clauses, but the present was not the stage for discussing them.
Their lordships divided on the amendment: Contents 8: Not Contents 29. The bill was then read a second time.

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS BILL.
Lord Calthorpe Lord Calthorpe moved the second reading of the bill for preventing Cruelty to Animals.
The Earl of Rosslynwas not aware of the existence of this bill, but he was far from approving of it. Under the provisions of the laws which were passing on this subject, it would soon be impossible to tame a horse. If a man were to cut a horse's tail or ears, according to this bill he would be guilty of a misdemeanour. He objected to the increase of the penal laws, and disapproved of the principle of teaching people humanity by law.
Lord Suffieldwished the bill to pass, because it limited the discretion at present possessed by the magistrates. As the law now Mood, a man could be fined 5l. for cutting the tail of his horse.
Lord Culthorpesaid, there was a great distinction between compelling men by law to be humane, and preventing them from being cruel.
The Lord Chancellordisapproved of the bill and would oppose it in a future stage.
The bill was read a second time.